28 August, 2006

Ismahan recalled similar experiences. In elementary school, she had tried to fit in. As an adult, though, “I know I don’t have to fit in,” she said. “I don’t think Muslims have to assimilate. We are not treated like Americans. At work, I get up from my desk and go to pray. I thought I would face opposition from my boss. Even before I realized he didn’t mind, I thought, ‘I have a right to be a Muslim, and I don’t have to assimilate.’ “

The article goes to desperate lengths to spin this as an upsurge in faith, and being different from “those” Muslims in Europe who have started killing their own countrymen. It may be true. But this should be raising all sorts of red flags.

Lack of assimilation is bad, even if the group in question isn’t part of a culture with violent, fascist tendencies. No matter how benign on the surface, multiculturalism, or the failure to culturally assimilate, is malignant. It is corrosive to the national fabric and destructive to peace.

Multiculturalism is death.

Update:

To the charge that American Muslims aren’t so well assimilated, one answers Yes, we are. He makes some fair points.

The whole issue of identity is really not as critical as that of modernity. Its reconciling tradition with modernity that is tricky. We all have multiple identities and we rarely “choose” one over another, but the conflict between modernity and tradition is sometimes trickier to navigate.

I think any kind of group identity can be a problem, but failure to modernize is really why goatherders are flying airplanes into skyscrapers. I don’t know how much I buy all of his apologetics (I haven’t followed all the links yet) but it seems worth a look. Ditto for the comments on that page.

Mr Honeyford had made the mistake of espousing anti-multiculturalism before it was socially acceptable to do so, just as it was once wrong to be an anti-communist before everyone became one. He lost his career because his tone was wrong, and he did not subscribe to the then “correct” views of a very thorny subject. Hell hath no fury like a bien pensant contradicted.

14 August, 2011

If you’ve been reading this blog for a while you know that I’ve been saying for years that Great Britain is dead.

The British lost their freedom decades ago but didn’t notice. Hint: If you can’t buy a gun and use it legally for self defense, you have no liberty in any meaningful sense of the word. Add in so-called “multiculturalism“, and you have the death of a civilization.

They have all learned what most British politicians somehow cannot grasp – that the more encounters you have with our justice system, the less you fear it. A few ‘exemplary’ sentences – none of which will be served in full, or anything near it – will only help to spread the word that arson, robbery, violence, spite and selfishness are not punished here any more. Indeed these are the things we are now famous for around a world that once respected us.

And that is why we have many more nasty surprises waiting for us, here in The Country Formerly Known as Great Britain.

7 September, 2010

Why, I ask myself, must they contaminate their legitimate grievances over the left-wing bias of school curricula? By coupling patriotism with creationism, they are discrediting not only their own but everyone else’s attempts to counteract the leftist agenda.

In 2004, liberal historian Thomas Frank published What’s the Matter with Kansas?, a bestselling book in which the author expresses his utter mystification at how the citizens of Kansas could hold conservative values and vote Republican, when socialist economics and the Democratic Party were so self-evidently superior. While the author looked down his nose at the inscrutable ignorant rubes of Kansas, insultingly treating them like laboratory rats unable to solve the simplest maze, the book and its popularity ended up being more of a commentary on the ideological blindness of the author and his left-leaning readers: try as they might, they just don’t get it. As the book revealed, it’s not that left-wingers disagree with conservative principles; they actually cannot grasp the notion of having any principles whatsoever.

As part of the inevitable discussion of the most idiotic thing they’ve tried to do in Texas, Zombie summarizes his clear stance on evolution, which I whole-heartedly endorse:

The debate about the reality of evolution is over. Evolution happens, and it happens through natural selection. The evidence is beyond overwhelming and is conclusive.

If you quibble about the meaning of the word “theory” without knowing its definition in a scientific context, then you unintentionally have disqualified yourself from the conversation.

Intelligent design, creationism, or any other euphemism you care to use to describe “directed evolution,” are not scientific theories; they are religious beliefs, and as such have no place in a science class.

Denial of evolution is not a necessary adjunct of being Christian or having religious sentiments; it is entirely possible to be religious and to accept scientific realities like evolution, and many evolutionary scientists are also Christians.

“Darwinism” is not some sort of faith-based religion in its own right nor is it competing with Christianity, and anyone who claims so is either seriously misinformed or is purposely deceiving you.

The scientific community takes an extremely dim view of any official in a position of power who tries to undermine the teaching of evolution; this is a make-or-break “litmus test” issue for most scientists.

Therefore, the insistence by officials such as the Texas State Board of Education on tampering with evolution curriculum unnecessarily creates enemies out of many clear-thinking science educators who might otherwise applaud the TSBE’s pro-America and pro-factuality stance on other issues.

If anything, the textbooks approved by the California State Board of Education are even more politicized than Texas textbooks, and more ideologically biased. So: Why does the media ignore what happens in California textbooks? Because the state’s bias goes the other way. California-approved social studies textbooks are politically correct in the extreme, with multiculturalism and “social justice” as the defining characteristics. The pressure groups and board members setting policy for California’s (and hence a substantial portion of America’s) textbooks exceed their Texan counterparts in their extremism, but since California pushes the “correct” kind of extremism, you never hear about it.

This was a significant change from Marx’s and Lenin’s original ideas about communist revolution, which basically involved simply seizing power, public opinion be damned, and afterward propagandizing the masses to accept the new order. Gramsci realized that Marx had it reversed, and that the propaganda and indoctrination must happen first, in order to make the populace open to the idea of revolution; otherwise, rendered complacent by middle-class values and comforts, the populace would never consent to the upheaval of a revolution.

The media and public schools were correctly identified by Gramsci as the most influential cultural institutions, and it was therefore those that the left realized must be targeted.

And:

This explains the otherwise mystifying insistence by leftist educators on ignoring facts in favor of “politically correct” ideas and frameworks. I have little doubt that the majority of teachers and educators don’t even know they’re part of a Gramscian project but still plow ahead with their ideologically driven careers anyway, unaware that they are myrmidons paving the way for revolution.

Many good suggestions, most of which I agree with. One of the most important comes near the end: Break the teachers’ unions.

Teachers’ unions have become a major hindrance to decent education in this country. They prevent the firing of bad instructors, impose political orthodoxy on curricula, and in general resist any reforms which threaten their own power.

Furthermore, the teachers’ unions have been the driving force behind the Gramscian control of education (as discussed in Part IV of this essay), and are one of the reasons schools are politically biased in the first place.

I have no idea how to diminish the power of unions, so for now we’ll have to file this one under “wishful thinking.”

The teachers’ unions are arguably the most destructive force in the country. Part of breaking them will be opening education to a free market. Part would be pulling the plug on the cabinet seat given them by the Nasty Little Man. The entire Department of Education is unconstitutional anyway.

I seriously hope you read all five part. I’ve bumped this post to encourage it.

20 May, 2010

I read Ann Althouse’s objections to the idea here and here. I’m not convinced. This is nothing like burning flags to protest an anti-flag burning law. The target of the putative offense is not a law (except in the fevered minds of people who think Sharia is an actual law). When she quotes Taranto, both she and he miss the point.

The problem with the “in-your-face message” of “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” is not just that it is inconsiderate of the sensibilities of others, but that it defines those others–Muslims–as being outside of our culture, unworthy of the courtesy we readily accord to insiders. It is an unwise message to send, assuming that one does not wish to make an enemy of the entire Muslim world.

The point is that Islam is unworthy of courtesy. You have to put on the blinders of suicidal multiculturalism not to see that it’s an abhorrent culture. Note that this is not the same thing as saying that all Muslims are abhorrent. There are indeed moderate Muslims, but there is no moderate Islam.

Which reminds me,, I have a question for the parts of the “right” blogosphere went apoplectic over a Muslim woman winning the Miss U.S.A. contest:

Are you nuts?

What could be more western, more American, than parading around in a bikini? And what could be more opposite to that misogynistic burka that extremist Islam wraps its women in? This is a very encouraging sign of moderation and integration into our culture.

13 August, 2009

In Mr. Aslan’s view no danger remains. “The controversy has died out now, anyone who wants to see them can see them,” he said of the cartoons, noting that he has written and lectured extensively about the incident and shown the cartoons without any negative reaction. He added that none of the violence occurred in the United States: “There were people who were annoyed, and what kind of publishing house doesn’t publish something that annoys some people?”

“This is an academic book for an academic audience by an academic press,” he continued. “There is no chance of this book having a global audience, let alone causing a global outcry.” He added, “It’s not just academic cowardice, it is just silly and unnecessary.”

As reported in the Guardian, Sheila Blair, a professor of Islamic and Asian art at Norma Jean Calderwood University, has acknowledged being among the experts consulted by Yale, and she “strongly urged” YUP to publish the images in the book. What’s more, she has written a letter to the Times, explaining her reasoning: “To deny that such images were made is to distort the historical record and to bow to the biased view of some modern zealots who would deny that others at other times and places perceived and illustrated Muhammad in different ways.”

22 November, 2008

I thought Britain would be killed by its multiculturalism and long-term trampling on that most basic of all human rights: self defense. I’ve chronicled here how it’s essentially lost the war with radical Islam. But the coups de grâcemay hit its banks.

5 November, 2008

I’ll use this post as a place to gather ideas on what to do next. If you have suggestions, please leave a comment.

The first thing that occurred to me is how vital it is to protect the integrity of the voting process, especially now that ACORN, the professional voter fraud organization, has their man in the White House. It’s just insane and suicidal how easy voter fraud is in this country. In many states, including mine, poll workers aren’t even allowed to ask for ID. So I think we should push, nationwide, for:

Photo ID requirements for voting.

Reviewable paper trails for all ballots.

Safeguards against multiple votes – which could tie in to #1.

English-only ballots.*

Make fraudulent registration a felony for both the registrar and the registree.

* If you can’t understand English well enough to vote a ballot, you don’t understand it well enough to understand the issues. And spare me any accusations of “racism”. Race has nothing to do with language. It’s a great advantage for people to be bilingual – all of us in my family are – but it’s a disadvantage for a country to have multiple official languages. Language is culture. And multiculturalism is death.

Some good ideas there: Vouchers. Yes, a lot of the blame for yesterday’s debacle goes to public schools – or, as Lee Rodgers calls them – “ignorance factories”. If this country is to survive we have to get the NEA’s stranglehold off of our children’s brains. And don’t forget the universities:

Preliminary indications are that the youth vote (ages 18-29) was way up: an increase of somewhere over 2.2 million (maybe way over) from 2004 (a year in which it was very high), and as much as 13% over 2000. The Left’s dominance of the academy is now having a material impact on electoral politics. As we think about the future of conservatism, we ignore that at our peril.

Roger Kimball’s new edition of Tenured Radicals seems like an excellent starting point for that urgent discussion.

We’re getting beat on the ground, on campus, and in new technologies. Republicans should get as many smart 20-30 year olds in a room as possible ASAP and figure out how to mobilize people to spread Republican enthusiasm and use new technology (twitter, Facebook, text messaging, social networking, etc.) to do it. We also have to find a way to raise money and hit all 50 states.

I wonder if Arnold Schwarzenegger might run against Barbara Boxer for her Senate seat…

Here’s one case where even a complete RINO like Schwarzenkennedy would be an improvement. There aren’t many senators to the left of Boxer, and one of them is moving to the other end of Pennsylvania Ave.

27 April, 2008

You must read this article by Bruce Bawer. But take your blood pressure medication first. And keep breakable objects out of arm’s reach.

Islam divides the world into two parts. The part governed by sharia, or Islamic law, is called the Dar al-Islam, or House of Submission. Everything else is the Dar al-Harb, or House of War, so called because it will take war—holy war, jihad—to bring it into the House of Submission.

If you thought that Socialism benefited from useful idiots, you ought to contemplate how idiotic Islam’s useful are.

Leading liberal intellectuals and academics have shown a striking willingness to betray liberal values when it comes to pacifying Muslims. Back in 2001, Unni Wikan, a distinguished Norwegian cultural anthropologist and Islam expert, responded to the high rate of Muslim-on-infidel rape in Oslo by exhorting women to “realize that we live in a multicultural society and adapt themselves to it.”

In a scrupulously politically correct age, it’s not offensive to organize a “Kill the police!” demo or to preach that the government invented Aids in order to perpetrate an African-American genocide. You can pull that stuff and still be part of respectable society, hanging out with presidential candidates and whatnot. What’s grotesquely offensive is the chap who’s insensitive enough to point out such statements and associations.

(Steyn further notes that the Muslim Brotherhood may have its filthy fingerprints on his case.)

So allow me to be grotesquely offensive and point out that Islam’s useful idiots and Socialism’s useful idiots appear to be the same idiots.

I’ll go further: Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a heroine. And every Muslim man who beats his wife or forces his daughter into marriage is a pig and a coward. And every idiot, Muslim or not, who wants to impose Sharia law on the world can, to borrow a phrase from a favorite TV show, go frak themselves.

7 January, 2008

I thought I was impressed with Ayaan Hirsi Ali before. After reading this thoughtful review I am in awe. Here is a woman born into the backward, repressive tribalism of Islamic culture, and she knows Western history better than almost all Westerners. Her linkage of Multiculturalism to Romanticism is incisive. Our troubles come, as she says, not from too much reason but too little.

23 April, 2007

Yes, some cultures are inferior. Very much so. Multiculturalism is a noxious lie. On Breath of the Beast is a long post about our Indian Guilt. It contains some good advice for Islam:

We have bought into multiculturalism because we no longer have the fortitude, the honesty or the intelligence to look someone in the eye and tell them, “Look, you are humiliated because you do not have the culture or political leaders or the education to be otherwise. You really need to stop making such a big deal about feeling humiliated. Why not try some of these simple steps toward civilization instead:

1. Specifically outlaw honor killing

2. Stop beating your wife and/or kids.

3. Send your kids to a decent school where they won’t waste their time memorizing an entire “holy book” to the exclusion of learning critical thinking skills and studying arithmetic, science and geography.

4. Forget using Israel, Jews and America as the excuse for being a loser.

5. Understand that your leader (fill in one: Ahmadinejad, Assad, Kadafy, Mubarak, Abdullah etc…) is a tyrant of the worst sort and is actually working hard to keep you ignorant and filled with rage, that’s how your feudal system works.

6. For God’s sake stop thinking of anyone who believes (or doesn’t believe in him) in him (God that is) in a different way than you do as less than human. That only makes you feel worse when you see that those “unbelievers” live better than you do.

If you take care of all that, there would be no need for you to feel humiliated anymore.”

11 February, 2007

I just love saying that, because it’s a tri-lingual joke now. I’m reminded of it because the prissy busibodies in Brussells are campaigning to make French, the dying tongue of an irrelevant country, the de facto legal standard in the EU.

“Currently we have 23 official languages in the EU, that’s a true Tower of Babel. We need to chose a benchmark language for all judiciary texts, and we believe it should be French, for its precision and rigor,” said Maurice Druon, a French academic and a former Culture Minister.

31 July, 2006

England, described by an English immigrant as the country where freedom was lost so long ago that the English don’t even realize they aren’t free. Yet it finally seems to be dawning on some just how corrosive multiculturalism is.

Brick Lane is a glorious streak of neon and curry, of clubbers and fundamentalists, of old Jewish immigrant stories and new Muslim ones, in the guts of the East End. It is my home, and over the past week I have been sharing it with a little news story – and with another small sign that free speech in Britain is slowly sandpapered down by reactionary mini-mobs.